328 réponses à ce sujet

[Vhalkyrie]

Why not? Bethesda changed the ending with Fallout 3 when fans cried out how disappointed they were. That game followed a similar pattern to ME3. 99% of the game = Epic win. Ending = Epic fail. Fallout 3 had even less grounds to do so, and the DLC basically rewrites the ending. ME3 has so many plotholes that Bioware actually can make a 'redo' without violating the boxed ending.

[Darrellmeaney]

SNascimento wrote...

 First, I need to say why the endings are good.
.
Let's focus on the big picture and not be short sighted. Shepard gave the galaxy for the first time in millions of years a change to develop again in its own way, more than that, with the destruction of the mass relays, each species will evolve in a more unique way. And this for me is the beauty of the endings. Actually, if you take the green ending, life will develop in a way that not even the creator of the reapers could have fallowed.
.
Think about the Krogans, for example. They will be able to rebuild themselves with minimum interference from other species, a chance they never had. Same thing for the quarians and geth... depending ony your actions, they will try to live on peace together... and alone. The success of it will depend on the creators and the created, no one else. And so on.
.
And it's not like the galaxy will be isolated. From the codex we know ships in ME can travel something like 10 light years per day, that is very fast. Maybe not fast enough to the wide galaxy travels, but enough for most  people go back to their homeworld from Earth if they want (Wrex, for example) and enough for space travel and colonization to be viable.
.
In this part, I don't think the game lacked any closure of made our decisions meaninless. They do matter, but in a context different from the one in which they were made. A better one, if you will.
.
Not that everything was perfect, though. The dialogue with the Guardian was worse than I expected. It was something we were expecting since ME1, and it just didn't deliver. And of course, the Normandy flying away. That was just out of place, I wouldn't mind a bit of clarification there.
.
Now that it's all said, here is why Bioware CANNOT change the endings:
.
Simply put, it will be a crime with those who actually liked it. Who actually feels their jurney with Commander Shepard came to a meaninful and fulfilling conclusion. They cannot just take it away from those people.
.
Now, Bioware shouldn't change the endings at all, but if they want to tweak them a bit, the only thing I would ask is to not change them. Maybe improve the Normandy scene a bit, or offer a bit more option like what Shepard will do with the reapers once you control them. But in no way just erase the ones that are there and put new ones in the place.

So your saying that 91% of the fanbase should suffer a badly-written rushed ending to make the 9% feel good about themselves?

That's logical.... *facepalms*

[Meltemph]

  

 First, I need to say why the endings are good.

By your standards it was maybe good, but by just about ANY OTHER LITERARY STANDARD, it was bad.  The philosophy behind the choices at the end, are ineptitude quality thought proccess, to the point of hoping people dont actually FULLY think about the ending, and instead fill in the lack of anything with their own biases of human nature.
.

Let's focus on the big picture and not be short sighted. Shepard gave the galaxy for the first time in millions of years a change to develop again in its own way, more than that, with the destruction of the mass relays, each species will evolve in a more unique way. And this for me is the beauty of the endings. Actually, if you take the green ending, life will develop in a way that not even the creator of the reapers could have fallowed.

Who cares if his end resault was ending the singularity, only 1 of the endings even actaully DO THAT, and the other endings besides being logical leaps of ineptitude on the writers part, but blatently ignoring their own writing implications.  

The Reapers exist, this is a fact, the reapers were created, this is a fact, therefore ANY Galactic cycle AFTER the reapers could have, WITHOUT the reaper threat, at the VERY minumum, got to the point of being able to create the singualrity known as the reapers.  

The only way this is not possible is if there was a Singularity(unknown force) forcing these singularities(Reapers) to make sure that no other singualrities were created.  In otherwords the WHOLE premise of the ending the writers decided to go with AT BEST is that a singualrity was needed to control a singualrity to make sure a singularity wouldnt destroy the galaxy.  

That not only is BROKEN logic, but a terrible written ending by any other literary standard.  This is not even taking into account, what the writers were trying to infer with the synthesis ending, and how it literally removes any ability to take into account anything other then organics vs synthetics.  Which in turn quite literally pretends that this will create a nervana of biological and synthetic singualrity, while still having the OTHER singularity(Reapers) around and ignoring every other causality that the universe has.  It hurts me to think people thought this was deep on any level.

This is the writers essentially infering that all that is needed to change nature is to CHANGE nature or organics to an unknown variable.  It is so basic in philosophy that it almost seems like they knew what they were doing but didnt care.

I'm not even going to get into your other points, becasue qutie frankly it is fluff.

Modifié par Meltemph, 18 mars 2012 - 06:00 .

[Sentr0]

there is nothing to argue here, point is: they dont change the ending -> 95% of their fans (hardcore and not) will boycott every single product of EA/Bioware till the end of time.

Their call

[Gibb_Shepard]

I honestly don't see why adding coherence and closure to the ending would somehow impact your enjoyment.

That is unless you love plot holes, inconsistencies and vague implications of galaxy wide starvation.

[Subject M]

Jim Darksworn wrote...

How is having more options at the end going to devalue your experience in any way? Just because your satisfied with a mediocre ending it doesnt mean the rest of us should settle.

Mass Effect is about options, all we are asking for is more of them.

Very, very, very few people are like: OMG I cant stand it if people get a different ending then me!! or "caring for Liara devalues the entire human race!!)

Fortunatly I get the feeing OP is really not that type.

[The Night Mammoth]

DLC is optional.

That shouldn't be too difficult to understand.

[Caz Neerg]

 Two percent of the people who play liking the ending isn't a reason not to change it, especially when, judging it on it's narrative merits, rather than just as a game, it is an objectively bad ending. 

[Amialis666]

With the endings as they are, shepard is a traitor.
The giant army that is now stranded on a ruined earth, (Assuming the destruction of the citadel or the mass relays didn't wipe out most of the galaxy.) with no hope of getting home.

Even if they some how managed to survive on earth, it would be pure torture, especially for the krogan and the quarians.
The krogan finally have a cure for the genophage, and now the bulk of their army, and their leader wrex is stranded on earth. Even if there were still krogan on tuchancka, without their leader to guide them, they would like fall back into their old patterns of clan warfare.
The Quarians finally get Rannoch back, and then the bulk of the quarian fleet end up missing.
Now I am sure, the quarian and the geth did not send their full forces to the final battle, so their is still hope for them. But for those stranded, for tali, I am sure they would have rather they died.

The reapers winning would be preferable to the endings we got.

[Shaun72]

See more on Know Your Meme

Modifié par Shaun72, 18 mars 2012 - 05:47 .

[vigna]

legion999 wrote...

So if 99% hated something but 1% liked it it shouldn't be changed because of that 1%? What about the 99%?

I do think it is more like 25% vs 75%, but yeah....

[SNascimento]

Seeing some post here, it's easy to understand why so many people here didn't like the endings.
.
And if the sales of ME3 have any say in this, all people here are a minority. With all the rage with mp, Origin and Day 1 DLC, ME3 sold almost twice as much as ME2.
.
Anyway, just to clarify: I'm not saying they can't add new endings, just that they should not REPLACE the one that are already there. And saying "if you don't want, just don't download the DLC", is like saying Shepard wouldn't destroy the Alpha Relay if you didn't download 'Arrival'.

[kramerfan86]

You seem to be trying to argue both ways here "species can develop on their own" while claiming species will still be able to move around the galaxy with slower FTLs.

[Timpossible21]

Mixxer5 wrote...


See?  This is a well-developed ending outline.  Why the hell do we have what we have?

But If BW would do this...they would have to preety much redo the whole game. Mass Effect 3.5 - Fan Edition.

[sangy]

Instigator.


in·sti·gate
   [in-sti-geyt] Show IPA

verb (used with object), -gat·ed, -gat·ing.
1.
to cause by incitement; foment: to instigate a quarrel.

2.
to urge, provoke, or incite to some action or course: to instigate the people to revolt.

Was it fun?

[Sentr0]

Darrellmeaney wrote...

So your saying that 91% of the fanbase should suffer a badly-written rushed ending to make the 9% feel good about themselves?

That's logical.... *facepalms*

Actually only 2% liked the ending, here on BSN. But we already know this per cent is gonna be lower elsewhere... (bsn is the bulk of bioware lovers)

[Quietness]

If it releases as a DLC guess what? You don't have to download, just pretend the DLC doesn't exist and continue on your merry way ^^

[WQFNHJNHNFNFNFBFNFN]

Mass Effect was about being able to choose your journey. If you want you can choose to use the current ending. Everyone else can choose something that's... you know... not terrible.

[t003]

If they make an Endings DLC then just don't download it... *facepalm*

Modifié par t003, 18 mars 2012 - 05:48 .

[kramerfan86]

SNascimento wrote...

Seeing some post here, it's easy to understand why so many people here didn't like the endings.
.
And if the sales of ME3 have any say in this, all people here are a minority. With all the rage with mp, Origin and Day 1 DLC, ME3 sold almost twice as much as ME2.
.
Anyway, just to clarify: I'm not saying they can't add new endings, just that they should not REPLACE the one that are already there. And saying "if you don't want, just don't download the DLC", is like saying Shepard wouldn't destroy the Alpha Relay if you didn't download 'Arrival'.

How do sales show people are a minority?  Everyone who dislikes the ending owns the game obviously.  The fact someone bought the game =/= them enndorsing the ending.

[chibilombax]

I do seem to recall someone actually putting the math together for FTL travel. It would take near 30 years, I could be wrong, to travel from one end of the galaxy to the next. My main issue with this is not only can they not survive that long in a ship. Remember how fast fuel goes away in FTL travel? And that was the Normandy. I just don't feel they have the resources.

Sadly I do feel bad for the few nice players I've seen out there who do actually enjoy the endings. ( They exist ) Yes you're a minority but you played the games too. Changing the endings will still leave some players unhappy. However would you rather have a small group of people upset? Or a very large group that is possibly threatening your business?

[darkshadow136]

They can make a DLC for alternate endings. I'm sure it will be optional whether you want them or keep the originals.

Should they make alternate endings, in short yes. I'm not going to argue who is the majority, and who is the minority. The point is there is enough players that disliked the endings, and enough reviewers of the game, that it is in their best interest as a company to make an alternate ending DLC.

Those who cry foul and say that Bioware should not bend to this, they are wrong, it was done with Fallout 3 as an example. Also it is not a sign of weakness by Bioware to make an ending DLC, it is serving their customers to deliver a satisfactory product that meets their expectations. Companies that don't do this go under.

[Zu Long]

The Real Bowser wrote...

Catroi wrote...

This is why we should have got:
http://i.imgur.com/JhtqY.jpg

What we got is a bad joke

See?  This is a well-developed ending outline.  Why the hell do we have what we have?

Wow, that would have been awesome.

[DentedHalo]

SNascimento wrote...

 First, I need to say why the endings are good.
.
Let's focus on the big picture and not be short sighted. Shepard gave the galaxy for the first time in millions of years a change to develop again in its own way, more than that, with the destruction of the mass relays, each species will evolve in a more unique way. And this for me is the beauty of the endings. Actually, if you take the green ending, life will develop in a way that not even the creator of the reapers could have fallowed.
.
Think about the Krogans, for example. They will be able to rebuild themselves with minimum interference from other species, a chance they never had. Same thing for the quarians and geth... depending ony your actions, they will try to live on peace together... and alone. The success of it will depend on the creators and the created, no one else. And so on.
.
And it's not like the galaxy will be isolated. From the codex we know ships in ME can travel something like 10 light years per day, that is very fast. Maybe not fast enough to the wide galaxy travels, but enough for most  people go back to their homeworld from Earth if they want (Wrex, for example) and enough for space travel and colonization to be viable.
.
In this part, I don't think the game lacked any closure of made our decisions meaninless. They do matter, but in a context different from the one in which they were made. A better one, if you will.
.
Not that everything was perfect, though. The dialogue with the Guardian was worse than I expected. It was something we were expecting since ME1, and it just didn't deliver. And of course, the Normandy flying away. That was just out of place, I wouldn't mind a bit of clarification there.
.
Now that it's all said, here is why Bioware CANNOT change the endings:
.
Simply put, it will be a crime with those who actually liked it. Who actually feels their jurney with Commander Shepard came to a meaninful and fulfilling conclusion. They cannot just take it away from those people.
.
Now, Bioware shouldn't change the endings at all, but if they want to tweak them a bit, the only thing I would ask is to not change them. Maybe improve the Normandy scene a bit, or offer a bit more option like what Shepard will do with the reapers once you control them. But in no way just erase the ones that are there and put new ones in the place.

I don’t think anyone really believes we should disregard the ending we got, simply change the context to allow that ending to be possible for those that are happy with it and provide other choices for those that are not... I really don’t see why we need to be fighting with each other over this... a very significant number of people feel dismayed and crushed by these endings (I’m still sad about it myself), why do you feel the need to make such comments when instead of just being happy that you were happy?
 
I honestly just don’t get this... there are always going to be people of both sides of any argument who say silly thing or act like children but your post is not that of an immature or petulant person; your thoughts are clear, concise and mature... that being the case, I cannot see why you have decided to respond to the more inflammatory comments being made as if to give them some credence.
 
I’ve spent a significant portion of my time since completing ME3 in these forums and I can say with confidence that the majority option is that the endings are wrong and should be changed. With that basic truth I can see why you feel that people wish to change an experience that you were fortunate enough to have enjoyed. However, if you read through the comments fully you will see that most people favour change via DLC thus making the change optional. In any case, regardless of the vehicle chosen to deliver this change, I haven’t seen much in the way of comments actually supporting the wholesale culling of the current ending to be replaced with something else (beyond those at the extremes of the argument)... the primary theory at present is the Indoctrination Theory and the basic premise there is that the ending we got was never actually intended to be the real ending... that may or may not be true but, if it were, it would be difficult for you to argue that the ending we got was good if it was never intended to be an ending... I digress a little, but the primary point I’m trying to make is that this does not and should not need to descend into arguments about the 1% vs the 99% or anything else... Bioware is more than capable of crafting an ending which preserves your experience whilst giving the rest of us the experience that we desire.
 
To be very clear, it is not my intention in these comments to patronise or be condescending and if you feel that these comments constitute that then I apologise but I do genuinely feel that we can all get an ending that makes us happy without resorting to killing each other.

[nicksmi56]

How about people who like the endings *GASP* don't download it!